If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

DEEMS APPEAL FRIVOLOUS; CHANGES STANCE ON “IN FORMA PAUPERIS” STATUS

by Sharon Rondeau

(Jul. 17, 2017) — An order issued on Friday by a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Cody RobertJudy v. Obama, aka Barry Soetoro; Democratic National Committee and Organizing for Action, 17-4055, states that the appeal is “frivolous” but that it can go forward if the appellant, Judy, “pays the required fees.”

Judy had previously been granted in forma pauperis (IFP) status in the case, meaning that his income is insufficient for him to pay customary court fees and other associated costs.

Judy’s case, Judy v. Obama, 14-9396, began in July 2014 with the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah and was appealed to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals after the District Court’s dismissal. Having obtained the same result from the Tenth Circuit, Judy appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015.

As a Democrat presidential candidate in 2008 and 2012, Judy is seeking restitution from the defendants for damages he allegedly suffered based on the Clayton Act and Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Underlying that was Judy’s assertion that Obama did not meet the definition of “natural born Citizen,” a requirement in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution for the nation’s chief executive.

Obama claims a birth on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI, but no hospital in the Aloha State has claimed the event despite its well-known historical significance. Obama’s reported father was a British citizen when his son was born, another factor which some constitutional scholars say precludes Obama from possessing “natural born” status.

Judy alleges that the DNC and Obama’s political organization, Organizing for Action (OFA), knowingly put forth an ineligible presidential candidate who was elected by an uninformed electorate, serving as a usurper president and commander-in-chief for two terms.

Despite dozens of lawsuits beginning in August 2008 challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility, no court in the nation presented with the question has ordered discovery of Obama’s original identification documents in order to determine whether or not he is, in fact, a natural born citizen. As a former Democrat presidential candidate himself, Judy claims “standing” in the matter, a claim that has not been challenged by the courts.

Judy was granted IFP status by the District and Appellate courts in 14-9396. However, after appealing the case to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor denied him that status just before the high court embarked on its three-month summer recess.

Judy filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied after the Supreme Court returned from its break. The denial and Judy’s lack of funds were the determining factors in his abandoning the effort at the time.

In January of this year, Judy refiled his case at the District Court level to include newly-released information from a five-year criminal investigation into the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website in April 2011 purported to represent Obama’s original birth record. In a December press conference, lead investigator Mike Zullo revealed that two forensic analysts on different continents and working in different disciplines agreed with his conclusion that the image is a “computer-generated forgery.”

Also found to be fraudulent early on was Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form.

As the appellate court noted, the District Court denied Judy’s motions, after which Judy appealed to the Tenth Circuit and to the Supreme Court’s newest member, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch.

The new case was assigned #17-4055 by the Tenth Circuit. As of this writing, Judy has received no response from the Supreme Court as to the case’s status despite having received proof of delivery and making numerous inquiries to the clerk’s office.

Over the five years of the investigation, the mainstream media maintained a virtual blackout on Zullo’s findings, first announced on March 1, 2012. The initial revelations were augmented through two successive press conferences and a number of radio appearances, concluding with the December 15, 2016 presser.

While the opinion issued on Friday terms Judy’s appeal “frivolous,” it indicates that it could proceed were he to pay a $400 filing fee, citing “10th Cir. R. 3.3(B)(1), 42.1″ (p. 3).

In response to the court’s order, Judy told The Post & Email:

“In some ways it means Justice is only for sale. Proving my income was below the Federal Poverty level and the court’s continuing to order fees paid in the face of so much lawful evidence suggest this. Further, the District Court ruled in the affirmative for my Motion for IFP. The suggestion by the Court reflects justice might be ‘For Sale’ and certainly amplifies that the poor are discriminated against in the Court.

“I don’t think the ruling made a lick of sense because the District Court granted IFP status. It seems like an ‘excuse’ rather than a ‘reason.’ Would Justice take place if the ‘fees’ were paid by the ‘poor’? It seems quite a contradiction.

“The ‘Facts’ place the Court in a ‘cover-up’ because of the crimes against the US Elections. I think the ruling is a complete heist of Justice for the poor. It’s actually quite telling of the disrespect the Court has for US Elections. They have placed crimes against the US Elections in the ‘It’s OK’ category.

Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.

Every judge who has ruled on the matter has said that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. That includes the 2012 Georgia ballot challenge. Judy was a party to that case, and unsuccessfully appealed it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

None of which has to do with the courts’ ruling that Judy failed to adequately explain explain why he entitled to $100 million under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, or the Clayton Act.

@Rickey Rick Damon
Well, without arguing the Cases you mentioned specifically, as they apply to dis-similiar situations and circumstances of [Citizen at the Time if the Adoption if this Constitution, and naturalization law] , I do respect you’ve given more attention and hearing to it than the Courts in my Case.

To bad the tiny open threads don’t count in real Court History and you’re not a Judge in the Federal Courts. I may have respected you more than those who gave opinions without Public Hearings.

The serious flaws are both our Constitutional Rights have been violated, yours as a Voter in US Elections, mine as a Presidential Candidate in 3 US Elections.

I’ll represent you as best I can. God Bless Us in representing this horrendous assault upon our Civil Rights.

CRJ

Rick Damon Saturday, July 22, 2017 at 11:12 PM

@ Cody Judy

Judge Richard Gordon in Allen v. Arizona Democratic Party, et al.:

Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986 (1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702-03(1898) (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV); Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678,684-88 (Ind. App. 2010) (addressing the precise issue). Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), DOES NOT HOLD OTHERWISE.”

@Bendore
Very Odd you would represent the [US Courts] ” Belief of not Believing ???

US Sen Res 511 mentions (2 Parents)

As does the Naturalization Law of

8 U.S. Code § 1401 – Nationals and citizens of United States at birth.

(c)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person

Decided to spare you the “work” and just prove your error. Of course the Tenth Circuit Appeal is in consideration of the relative Motions and Reconsideration referenced and not the outdated reference your referring to.

Why would you do that on purpose? To deceive everyone? Those are rhetorical. You goals and motives exposed.

Excusing the “crimes” against the US Elections by disenfranchising Hawaii’s State Democratic Party: Obama Constitutionally not Qualified https://t.co/zByCyTZzyD

bendore Saturday, July 22, 2017 at 3:29 PM

US Courts do not believe in the two parents born on US soil theory of NBC. US Courts hold that if a person is born on US soil they are a NBC regardless of the citizenship of their parents and if a person is born abroad to at least one US Citizen they are a NBC.

Also, it is the position of the courts that the BC posted on the White House Site by Obama was a pdf and not a Certified Copy of a Hawaiian BC or in any way shape or form a work product of the state of Hawaii and hence, it cannot be used to prove or disprove the time or place of Obama’s birth and since it is a pdf it cannot possibly be a forgery of a Hawaiian BC because Hawaii only issues paper BCs

Before you make frivolous statements you should create a Scribd Account and Post the District Court Judges Order/Ruling on the [Motion for Relief of Judgement] and also the Order/Ruling on the [Motion for Reconsideration] and Post the Links here for reference. Then people could take some stock your comments not being malicious and deceptive.

Then we could see you [prove] your point about the District Court Judge not writing ,”Defendant’s were Excused”.

Please do some “work” for us instead of just against us , promoting your Fake News under a “anonymous name”, that would be really appreciated.

Also, Please also leave your Contact Email and Phone number in the comment section so we know you’re not a Robot.

Thanks.

Rick Daman Saturday, July 22, 2017 at 3:35 AM

@ Cody Judy

The District Court said no such thing. I have the District Court’s ruling in front of me.

You may be confusing the Court of Appeals ruling with the District Court’s ruling, but even that doesn’t say what you seem to believe it says. This is what the Court of Appeals said:

“Even taking all his allegations as true and construing them in the light most favorable to his case, we see nothing even suggesting that he would ever be entitled to any sort of relief for President Obama’s (and the other Defendants’) SUPPOSED wrongdoing.”

Neither the District Court nor the Court of Appeals ruled that any wrongdoing had taken place, so there was nothing for them to excuse.

As for precedent, nobody suggested that you had to find case law involving presidential eligibility. You needed to find some case, or at least some interpretation of § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act, which suggests that someone in even a remotely similar situation as yours would be entitled to relief under one or more of those statutes. Any lawyer who is familiar with appellate work would tell you the same thing.

Congratulations on raising the filing fee, but your appeal is going to be denied. If I am wrong about that, I will come back here and humbly apologize.

It was with a great appreciation and a few heart felt tears that i received in the mail the donations that totaled up the $505.00 Filing Fee for the Tenth Circuit Court.

My own contribution only had to be $100.00.

To the many people who reached deep into their own pockets to help and support, I say “Thank You!”

I immediately called the District Court Clerk Tracy and transferred the funds; so the US Tenth Circuit should recognize that Today.

Our Goal was reached, and it was on Time. Utah celebrates their State Holiday on the 24th of July with massive Fireworks. ..and every bank is closed Monday. So I really wanted to get it paid by today.

Thank you again for your quick and timely expedition of your contributions that came from many States of our Union. I do hope you will also feel a little spirit in accomplishments for our United States of America.

@RickDamon Pointing out the obvious that the Courts have no obligation to Review a labeled “frivolous” case moors those arguments and opinions.

The District Court related it had “excused the Defendants from wrong- doing” . They should not be excused.

Confusing “case law” for “law” is a low trick of words. Can you point out for all of us Case Law between Presdential Candidates with the [natural born Citizen] Art. II. Clause as Claim?

There is none to cite.

Can you point out Case Law where the US Elections were compromised by Corporations acting to usurp the Constitution with whole States being disenfranchised?

There are none.

It’s insulting intelligence to frame Precedent as moot because it hasn’t happened before.

Rick Damon Thursday, July 20, 2017 at 9:38 PM

@Cody Robert Judy

I’m not trying to argue facts with. I’m trying to point out to you, and to others, that the dismissal of your lawsuit, and the subsequent denials of your appeals, have nothing to do with your facts.

Both the District Court and the Court of Appeals ruled that you failed to demonstrate that you have a legal claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, or the Clayton Act. As far as the courts are concerned, nothing else matters. You have to get over that legal hurdle first before anything else comes into play.

I have read the opinions of the District Court and the Court of Appeals, and I have read your brief. The Court of Appeals ruled “Judy cites no basis in law for his claim that he is entitled to damages under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act.” You still haven’t done that. Your appeal cites no precedent, no case law, and no legal expert opinion to establish that you are entitled to the damages that you are asking for.

You can’t win an appeal unless you address the specific reasons why your lawsuit was dismissed. Good luck if you raise the money to pay the filing fee, but I’m afraid that you need much more than just luck.

Jeffrey Harrison Thursday, July 20, 2017 at 9:08 PM

P.S. Cody will reach the mark for funds for the court filing. Others note, he hasn’t requested
funds for others needs. He is proud and wouldn’t ask for it. Others out there, if you feel led
to further assist Cody this will show we have his back. From what I can tell he like many of
us are self funded and working on related projects. In addition, Cody will have other costs in relation to the court filing. That would be traveling and etc…

@RickDamon – Don’t really like arguing the Facts in a forum that has no teeth. It seems a waste of my time.

Obots have been reduced to an obscure open-thread somewhere on a tiny island and seem most desperate to make of my life some kind of a Reality Show. For the life- of -me I can’t figure out “Why?” if it’s just a “waste” and they are “secure” in their claims and facts?

I always consider the source and motives behind such frothing excitement over saving everyone they don’t care about or know?

They always forget Obama’s own Attorney’s have mocked people for bringing actions into Court who did not have what they referred to as “standing as a Presidential Candidate”.

We all must consider if no Civil Right exist for a Presdential Candidate to run a “Fair & Equal” Race” under the US Constitution’s Standard, Professional Politicians feel free to “make -it-up” as they want, rather than adhering to the Will of “We The People” .

Tyranny is defined by a lack of adherence to a Fair Standard. It’s plain and simple.

I’ve often expressed the Obots should by all accounts be hoping and supporting the Courts taking a look at the evidence and arguments Publicly rather than the dark and secret chambers where “secret combinations & deals” get done that wipes out America’s Choice. They if their motives were True ought to be encouraging and supporting Hearings.

We see clearly, they do not want anyone to have “Standing”, and the reasons for that are nefarious.

9 times since 2000 the Congress has tried to change the definition of (Natural Born Citizen) and all 9 times… it Failed.

America’s Choice must be preserved and if they want a change, it needs to be done properly with 2/3rds of Congress responsibly towards the People’s Will in their Elected.

Until such, a stand must be taken for We The People. I have recognised this very clearly.

Jeffrey Harrison Thursday, July 20, 2017 at 7:44 PM

Cody, I sent you funds yesterday. Let me share with others if they use the mail, a good
way to send a donation is to use Priority Mail. Doing this, it should take 2 to 3 days to arrive.
In doing so, I also recommend using a Money Order.

Priority Mail takes 2 to 3 days (costs about $6.00). For 1 to 2 days, the Postal Service has Express Mail.

I have heard Cody speak many times. Likewise, I have read his articles, and I am impressed.
To me he is a bright person. Additional, I have spoke with Cody a few time over the phone.
He is a gentleman, and was highly respectful. Others have attacked him. I say, let’s give
this fellow a shot. Many have stabbed him via attacks. And after this, he still has shown a
good attitude. And I haven’t heard him speak ill of those who have been cruel to him.

Cody has lead the way. Bravely, he has stepped forward. He has not requested to be
carried. Being that he has lead by example, let’s have his back. Therefore, I hope other
too will assist him with funds to do his work.

This is much better than 5K for the SCOTUS Filing, that used the same excuse.

Rick Damon Thursday, July 20, 2017 at 2:06 PM

It’s obvious that the people commenting here don’t understand why Judy’s lawsuit was dismissed and why it has been found to be frivolous. The dismissal has NOTHING to do with Obama’s birth certificate.

Judy filed a civil lawsuit asking for money damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and the Clayton Act. In 2014 District Court Judge Stewart ruled “After carefully reviewing Plaintiff’s Complaint, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s suit is frivolous. Plaintiff’s claims lack an arguable basis in law or fact…” In other words, Judge Stewart was saying that Judy failed to state a claim which is legally recognized under the statutes he cited in his lawsuit. Judy appealed and the Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Stewarts’s ruling, stating:

“Judy cites no basis in law for his claim that he is entitled to damages under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act. Even taking all his allegations as true and construing them in
the light most favorable to his case, we see nothing even suggesting that he would ever be entitled to any sort of relief for President Obama’s (and the other Defendants’) supposed wrongdoing. Judy cannot point to a single case that construes any of these statutes in a way supporting his claims for relief. Next, because we see no scenario where he would be entitled to relief under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act, we also agree with the district court that his complaint was frivolous.”

In order to prevail on appeal, Judy has to convince the Court that he is entitled to damages under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act. But his appeal doesn’t even try to do that. Instead he just introduced more material about the birth certificate. But under the Federal Rules you can’t even get to the facts of your case until you have established that you have a legal claim for relief. Judy didn’t do that the first time he appealed this lawsuit, he didn’t do it when he appealed to the Supreme Court, and he hasn’t done it in this appeal.

Finally, he was denied In Forma Pauperis status because the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure specify that IFP motions must be denied in cases which have been ruled to be frivolous. Judy’s lawsuit has been ruled to be frivolous by both the District Court and the Court of Appeals, so he isn’t entitled to IFP status this time around.

This is much better than 5K for the SCOTUS Filing, that used the same excuse.

trader jack Thursday, July 20, 2017 at 3:08 AM

Well, I don’t know whether you will win or not, but a small contribution is made to make Dr.Conspiracy mad,
I showed him that the birth certificate were no bound in binders , but where in post binders and could not be lain down for photographing and that meant the curvature on the birth certificate was fake,
Have fun with this stuff.

By the way he also deleted all the evidenceI presented to him. Must be good to be a strong Democrat.

To TF Bow, the case is NOT frivolous. Obama usurped the Presidency,by fraud, during time of war. That made Obama a counterfeit POTUS and Joseph Biden a counterfeit VP. Obama is NOT an Article II, Sec. 1, “Natural Born Citizen”.

Cody Robert Judy is on solid constitutional grounds. Obama has never been the bona-fide President of the United States. I told people that (9) years ago. I stand my ground.

By virtue of the usurpation of the Presidency by Obama, during time of war, Obama became a spy under 10USC and a traitor under 18USC. See: “There is NO ‘President’ Obama”: htttp://www.thepostemail.com/09/17/2010/there-is-no-president-obama/

I spoke with a DOJ agent, Ms. Summers, at the DOJ in DC in June. I had sent a copy of a criminal information to US Attorney General Jeff Sessions by regular mail, in May,2017 regarding Obama’s usurpation. I had sent the original information,by regular mail, to President Trump.

In June, I RESENT the information, this time by Registered, Return Receipt requested. Tracking #s and all. The USPS has now confirmed that President Trump is IN RECEIPT of a letter that I wrote in May, 2017.

Obama is the nation’s SECOND counterfeit President. Chester Arthur did the same thing.
Indeed, McCain,Cruz,Rubio,Swarzenegger, and Jindal are likewise constitutionally barred from being POTUS or VP.

None of those people mentioned meet the legal definition of a “Natural Born Citizen” which is “One born in the US to parents who are both US Citizens themselves” (See: Minor v Happersett, (1874) USSCt. ) and which was affirmed and has been reaffirmed several times by the US Supreme Court.

I am currently suing Cruz,Rubio,Jindal and the State of NY in Laity v NY, NY State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 3rd Department. None of the (3) are NBCs. The NY State Board of Elections fraudulently misrepresents US Constitutional criteria for being POTUS, on their website. They cite the criteria as being “born a citizen” versus the actual criteria that a POTUS must be a “Natural Born Citizen”. The terms are NOT interchangeable nor are they tantamount to each other.

ALL NBCs are citizens but all citizens are NOT NBCs.

Jeffrey Harrison Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 6:30 PM

I say “all aboard, all aboard, the train is about to leave the station”. “Please have your ticket
ready and proceed to the gate”. “All others without tickets, please step aside for passengers
that have tickets”. In other words, I and others truly and fully support Cody Judy. Others,
we’re going to keep on, without you.

We know he has an uphill battle. But he is not only fighting on a personal level, but he is
also fighting for all Americans. He is brave and has a fighting spirit. Like our founding
fathers, he has led the charge.

This thing with Obama goes much deeper and darker than we know. Obama didn’t accomplish his tasks on his own. He was puppet. Who are the puppet masters?
Let’s (also) go after the other big fish and put them away too. Let’s starting thinking big and let’s bag the big bad guys (Obama’s handlers).

Our founding fathers took on the British and weren’t suppose to win. We don’t know if
Cody will win, but he has a lot of fight in him. He has been willing to be the point man.
He has only requested assistance when he has needed it. He has spent his own funds
and time. So, let’s not only support him with words and prayers, but honor his request
for assistance.

TODAY 7-18-2017 I spoke with a District Court Clerk 3 times and a Tenth Circuit Court Clerk 1×., for about an hour.

There is a Team of 5 Clerks in The US Circuit Court that handles (Utah) and the one I spoke with yesterday was singing a different song than the one I spoke with today.

It’s a story all by itself, but I won’t get into it, or relate the conversations and conflictions of the Clerks , but will relate the Interest Points of the relative ruling.

It is [not] the District Court Fees that i have to pay, it is the [Appellate Court Fees ]($550.00). This will be confirmed by the District Court Clerk when she receives the Ruling. ( Thursday at the latest )

I will comment the Order is a little confusing if you did not know that the District Court collects “Filing and Docket Fees” for the Appellate Courts as well as themselves.

Let me also express the “outright embarrassments I feel towards Justice as I know many of you do, at the idea of providing all the evidence and facts I have as a Presidential Candidate against another Presidential Candidate to have the Courts call the Complaint “Friviolous”.

A moron could understand it, but the Justices … well., I better not say. Let me express my biggest reason and expectations for paying the Filing Fee.

Justices may think I’m buried and its a self imposed fine, but to be buried eternally in the gravestones of history with 30 pieces of silver just like Judas was as Traitor (accept to our US Constitution) will be their Reward.

It’s not a little case, it’s not a thing of the past, it’s US HISTORY and it’s BIG.

To be apart of the Crowd who would dig with their fingernails into the ground for a hole to hide in the dark, rather than FACE the Lord and his all consuming light and Truth, is a fate I really think is deserving of Traitors and Tyrants.

I think if they WANT the MONEY , we should be kind and loving and give it to them. ❤ The Lord can sort it out as He Wills.

I’m completely content with what I’ve done, and how I’ve represented the Facts. To COVER UP the Truth and the Crimes is for the dead who are walking to ask for a shovel to dig their grave.

“Let them have the shovel for Heavens sake”

T.F. B0W Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 12:00 PM

At this point, it is just cruel to encourage Judy further: this case has been repeatedly called frivolous by the various courts, and Judy needs to focus on the more immediate concern of finding permanent housing.

Kandy Ricotta Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 11:06 AM

Cody, we support your efforts 100%, and will be sending you a donation today towards your filing fee. Keep up the good fight for all of us, please! We appreciate and highly respect your determination, and we are praying for you!

http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams279.htm
In his book in 2015, A Time for Truth, I see no mention of Ted’s citizenship. For me, Ted is not a “Constitutional Republican”, he is a charlatan; he is part of a regal, not legal, licensed attorney profession that will knowingly subvert it’s own foundational document, the U.S. Constitution, as it applies to the original restrictive intentions of “natural born Citizen”!

Therefore, today’s Knowledge Patriots need to support Cody Judy’s “frivolous” defense of the keystone of our inherited Constitutional Republic, being, that the invisible brain thinking of any President of the United States will be that of a human being that can only think “America First” and, ideally, never have internalized the enemy-thinking of “Foreigners First” or “Enemies First”!

ARREST THE SOETORO-OBAMA II’s, BARRY AND MICHELLE, FOR SYNDICATED ID-FRAUD AND TREASON and RECONTINUE AMERICA’S CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC OF 1789!

Indy Hoopster Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 8:40 AM

Wait until this gets to Principal Session’s desk! These judges are walking on eggshells. Money is on the way!

Here’s my 2 cents and my donation to Cody will be in the mail tomorrow via priority mail.

This evening I just spoke to Cody to touch base with him and to aid him with funds and
give him some moral support.

If his case may get to the next level via a fee, then to me it can’t be too frivolous. Frivolous:
inappropriate, silly. Well, that speaks to me. For eight year we had an USURPER Obama
in the White House. In spite of evidence from endless sources, our elected leaders and
judges neglected to either view or examine the facts and evidence from experts. They
either avoided the subject, went mute, or attacked the evidence or the messenger. To
me this was silly.

It was inappropriate for Obama to slither his way into the White House under fraudulent
credentials (fake birth certificate, recycled Soc. Sec. No#., backdated / fabricated Sel. Ser.
Reg. Form). It was silly for Obama to claim many things that he wasn’t to fool many to
win their vote.

For me the proper thing to do is support Cody Judy and give him a shot to hold Obama
accountable. If this is frivolous, then I am all in for Judy. In my opinion, Judy is moral,
intelligent, and would have been a much better president then Obama could ever have
been. .

Let’s assist Cody and give him a shot. We have everything to gain with him. Supporting
him won’t be frivolous. Indeed, aid him with some funds. This could be a huge investment.

There does seem to be a little confusion here. When I spoke with the Court Clerk he remarked that the IFP granted by the District Court in 2014 was only good for 2 Years. That would have ended in 2016.

However, the Tenth Circuit did receive a Motion for IFP. The 10th Circuit Clerk indicated that it was the District Court’s Fault for ruling on the Motion and Reconsideration without pre payment of fees or another IFP Motion.

The Fault was not mine, which is why the 10th Circuit has given 20 days to “Pay” the filing fee, but is not requiring the Filing Fee to the 10th Circuit for the Appeal ( normally $300 )

The many readers of the Order may interpret differently, but if it was flat frivolous the Order certainly didn’t require a dissertation of the Facts regarding Pelosi and Obama which seem culpable. (?)

The “Friviolous” label was given by the District Court, and the Court of Appeals needs required fees of District Court to undertake a serious review of the evidence “they” mentioned.

One could say I was being penalized for the District Court’s lapse of requiring a new IFP MOTION. It certainly is true, but the Appeals Court has also recognized this.

Giving 20 days is a “Mercy” from the District Court’s mistake. How many “mistakes” we do not know.

It seems the Circuit Appeals Court certainly could have made an Order regulating without a concern for the District Court Fees the case as Frivolous based on the IFP if the Appeals Case which seems to be granted , pending the District Court’s “Fees” covered.

It is an interpretation to consider the Court of Appeals reference of the “District Court’s label of friviolous” (as reference), to say they also find it so when they say they cannot consider the Case seriously until that base is crossed.

We would consider the Appeals Court “baiting” for a dollar if this was the case. This would seem very cruel if true.

The fact that the District Court granted IFP status is irrelevant. Rule 24 (a)(3)(A), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, applies to appellants who were granted IFP status by the District Court:

Rule 24. Proceeding in Forma Pauperis
(a)(3) Prior Approval. A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis
in the district-court action, or who was determined to be financially unable to
obtain an adequate defense in a criminal case, may proceed on appeal in forma
pauperis without further authorization, unless:
(A) the district court – before or after the notice of appeal is filed –
certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith or finds that the party is
not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis and states in writing its
reasons for the certification or finding.

Judy’s appeal was found to be frivolous in part because he never addressed the reasons why his lawsuit was dismissed in the first place.